Can anti-smoking television advertising affect smoking behaviour? Controlled trial of the Health Education Authority for England's anti-smelting TV campaign
Can anti-smoking television advertising affect smoking behaviour? Controlled trial of the Health Education Authority for England's anti-smelting TV campaign
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/tc.9.3.273
复制
发表时间：
2000-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
5.2
通讯作者：
Stapleton, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McVey, D;Stapleton, J
目的：评价英国卫生教育当局的反吸烟电视广告运动在激励吸烟者戒烟和防止已戒烟者复吸方面的效果。设计-一项前瞻性对照试验在英格兰中部和北部的四个电视区域进行。一个地区没有干预（对照），两个地区接受电视反吸烟广告（电视媒体），一个地区接受电视反吸烟广告加当地组织的反烟草运动（电视媒体+ LTCN）。电视广告分两个阶段播出，历时18个月；在第一阶段，不同电视区域的广告强度是不同的。通过两阶段随机抽样抽取5468名男性和女性（吸烟者2997人，戒烟者2471人），在干预前进行访谈，其中3610人在第一阶段活动结束6个月后再次接受访谈。只有那些在6个月时接受采访的人在18个月时被随访到主要终点，当时有2381名受试者再次接受采访。主要结果测量-在18个月的随访中比较三个干预水平的吸烟自我报告。干预效果的优势比根据干预前的预测结果进行调整，并使用元分析方法汇总吸烟者和戒烟者。结果：18个月后，9.8%的成功复试者戒烟成功，4.3%的已戒烟者复吸。与对照组相比，仅在电视媒体中不吸烟的合并调整优势比为1.53(95%可信区间（CI） 1.02至2.29,p = 0.04)，而电视媒体+ LTCN与对照组相比，合并调整优势比为1.67 （95% CI 1.0至2.8,p = 0.05）。没有证据表明当地烟草控制网络与电视媒体结合会产生额外的效果（优势比1.15,95% CI 0.74至1.78,p = 0.55）。在第一阶段的电视媒体宣传活动之后，也没有证据表明有任何干预效果，包括在第一阶段改变广告强度没有效果。将这些结果应用到一个典型的人群中，其中28%是吸烟者，28%是戒烟者，如果没有这项运动，在18个月的时间里，戒烟者和复吸者的数量是相等的，这表明这项运动将使吸烟率降低约1.2%。结论：英国健康教育当局的反吸烟电视宣传活动通过鼓励吸烟者戒烟和帮助那些已经戒烟的人防止复吸，有效地降低了吸烟率。第一阶段的宣传活动没有效果表明，如果要在这种强度的广告中产生影响，就必须进行长期的宣传活动。这些结果支持了英国政府最近资助类似运动的决定，并建议反吸烟电视广告应该作为任何人口减少吸烟战略的重要组成部分进行常规工作，减少吸烟率将对实现英国政府在未来10年内预防30万癌症和心脏病死亡的目标做出重大贡献。
Objectives-To evaluate the effectiveness of the Health Education Authority for England's anti-smoking television advertising campaign in motivating smokers to give up and preventing relapse in those who had already given up.Design-A prospective, controlled trial was conducted in four TV regions in central and northern England. One region received no intervention (controls), two regions received TV anti-smoking advertising (TV media), and one region received TV anti-smoking advertising plus locally organised anti-tobacco campaigning (TV media + LTCN). The TV advertisements were screened in two phases over 18 months; during the first phase the intensity of the advertising was varied between TV regions. 5468 men and women (2997 smokers, 2471 ex-smokers) were selected by two stage random sampling and interviewed before the intervention, of whom 3610 were reinterviewed six months later, after the first phase of the campaign. Only those interviewed at six months were followed to the main end point at 18 months when 2381 subjects were re-interviewed.Main outcome measures-Self reports of cigarette smoking at the 18 month follow up were compared between the three levels of intervention. Odds ratios for intervention effects were adjusted for preintervention predictors of outcome and pooled for smokers and ex-smokers using meta-analytic methods.Results-After 18 months, 9.8% of successfully re-interviewed smokers had stopped and 4.3% of ex-smokers had relapsed. The pooled adjusted odds ratio for not smoking in the TV media only condition compared to controls was 1.53 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.02 to 2.29, p = 0.04), and for TV media + LTCN versus controls, 1.67 (95% CI 1.0 to 2.8, p = 0.05). There was no evidence of an extra effect of the local tobacco control network when combined with TV media (odds ratio 1.15, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.78, p = 0.55). The was also no evidence of any intervention effects after the first phase of the TV media campaign, including no effect of varying the intensity of the advertising during this initial phase. Applying these results to a typical population where 28% smoke and 28% are ex-smokers, and where there would be an equal number of quitters and relapsers over an 18 month period without the campaign, suggests that the campaign would reduce smoking prevalence by about 1.2%.Conclusions-The Health Education Authority for England's anti-smoking TV campaign was effective in reducing smoking prevalence through encouraging smokers to stop and helping prevent relapse in those who had already stopped. The lack of an effect after the first phase of the campaign indicates that if advertising at this intensity is to have an impact, a prolonged campaign is necessary. These results support the UK governments' recent decision to fund similar campaigns, and suggests that anti-smoking TV advertising should be undertaken routinely as an essential component of any population smoking reduction strategy, Reducing smoking prevalence would make a substantial contribution to achieving the UK government's target of preventing 300 000 cancer and heart disease deaths over the next 10 years.